On 2008-02-26, J. Cliff Dyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So do you believe that you should not be able to do natural
> division without explicitly casting ints as floats,
IMO, you're begging the question by using the phrase "natural
division" when what you mean is "floating point division", but
yes, I prefer requiring explicit conversion to floating point.
> or is yourw concern just that you want to still be able to to
> integer division simply?
Nope. I would prefer that int OP int always produce an int.
> For me personally, I'm happy knowing that integer division is
> still available through the // operator. I'm not offended
> that other, highly useful forms of division would be given
> operator status. Granted, I'm not old school like you, but I
> do appreciate clean design, and typing:
>
> float(3)/4 always struck me as an ugly hack to get integers to do
> something that comes naturally to them--divide into a result outside the
> set of integral numbers.
Again, you're begging the question by using the term "natural"
to describe your opinion. I find int OP int => float to be
unnatural. It's much too "implicit" for me.
> I agree that integer division is useful and important, but I
> don't think it's a travesty to support other kinds of
> division, especially when integer division still has its own
> operator.
If integer division is going to have it's own operator, why not
the same for integer subtraction or integer multiplication?
Yes, I know the theoretical answer, but from a computer
architecture POV, integer addition and floating point addition
are completely separate and unrelated things.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Well, O.K.
at I'll compromise with my
visi.com principles because of
EXISTENTIAL DESPAIR!
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
